[sldev] Developer directory on secondlife.com

[Dzonatas]

Jason Giglio wrote:
> Dzonatas wrote:
>> If the contribution is under the terms of the GPL and with the bounds 
>> of the OSI, I don't see such implicit bindings being a problem as 
>> they are bounded. However, another license within the bounds of the 
>> OSI *or* within the bounds of the contribution license may not have 
>> such an implicit binding prevention.
>>
>> I hope LL intends to only append a copyright on each contribution, so 
>> that the Contribution Agreement is a... likewise OSI certified 
>> license. =)
>
> Dzontas,
>
> No, I think you misunderstand.  Linden Lab cannot accept GPL licensed 
> contributions.  They require the right to relicense the code under 
> commercial licenses.
>
> Basically you must give them full copyright power over the 
> contribution.  This is not unprecedented, the FSF requires a similar 
> full copyright assignment.
>
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html
>
> It does mean LL is free to close your code, however you retain all 
> your rights under the code too.
>
> -Jason
>
>

You are right, but I disagree with your point that LL cannot accept GPL 
contributions. I believe that is more of a choice to include software 
together as a single work. There is obviously already software that is 
under a GPL license being distributed by LL to make SL work. This is 
part of the reasons why there existed the code library version of the 
GPL, which was more explicit about a contribution being a separate work.

I saw many concerns on these mail list discussions about SL being fully 
open sourced. For example, the discussion about the beta 3D audio being 
proprietary. There is the argument that LL must choose only open source 
versions of 3D audio features to include in the SL distribution. 
However, being "open source" does not exclude the use of such 
proprietary features. In fact, to be OSI Certified, any given open 
source license cannot exclude the use of proprietary 
features/extentions. The points made to exclude the 3D audio package is 
moot, as it is not a single work with SL.

Also, I haven't confused "Open Source" with "Free Software".  Any GPL'd 
software is not prevented from being further commercialized, and it is 
not prevented from being the sole license added to such software, and it 
is not mandatory that only one copyright assignment exist. *Open source* 
describes general practices in production and development which promote 
access to the end product's sources. Open source is not a scheme to make 
all software distributed from a company "free" as in "free beer."

Simply by listing the source of the proprietary software, LL has 
complied with the general ethics of open source. This is "source" as in 
"origin" or "original work."

LL is able to accept GPL'd software and include it in its distribution. 
LL can close GPL'd code with an additional license from the author(s). 
It appears the Contribute Agreement is the default.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20070314/b537c4cd/attachment.htm